WordPress 2.0 is better than ever (NewsForge)
WordPress 2.0 is out, and it brings a slew of improvements and new features, including WYSIWYG editing, user roles, easy database backups, and more. The WordPress home page describes the software as "state-of-the-art semantic personal publishing platform," but when you boil it down, WordPress is just damn good blogging software. WordPress is written in PHP, requires a MySQL database, and is available under the GPL. It's easy to use and fairly powerful."
Posted Jan 6, 2006 20:10 UTC (Fri)
by roskegg (subscriber, #105)
[Link] (6 responses)
My earliest experience of MySQL is seven years ago, when I bought a book on SQL. I brought it home, all excited to be learning how to use big databases. I typed in the very first, simple example in the book. An outer join or something. It didn't work! Hopped on IRC, and found out "that isn't supported. MySQL is for SPEED!"
Installed Postgres. Typed in some really complex examples from later in the book. They all worked without a flaw!
I thought, "screw speed, I'm going to use something that actually works; I know they'll speed it up in the future, and when MySQL gets around to supporting this stuff, it'll definitely slow down itself."
And so far I've been right!
Posted Jan 6, 2006 21:57 UTC (Fri)
by mikec (guest, #30884)
[Link] (1 responses)
How about using the "right tool"?
There are those applications which require a rich database capability and those that do not...
WYSISWYG blog publishing tools don't seem to fit that bill... So, the only metrics of interest in this case would likely be speed and stability.
Again, from my perspective, I should not even know that there is a database running. So, requiring them to use one or the other smells a bit like trap that Microsoft likes to lay out...
That is, you must have the right list of buzzwords and mis-leading statements about compaitibility and compliance or you are not worthy of consideration. Then in the end, they generally provide the least stable, capable and cost effective solution relative to either what _could_ be accomplished or even what _is_ available.
Posted Jan 7, 2006 4:38 UTC (Sat)
by zblaxell (subscriber, #26385)
[Link]
# Not really SQL
with
# Not really Perl
Now suppose you wanted to send email whenever someone replies to someone else's posting. In SQL, you could add a trigger or rule, a message queue table, and a daemon which sends the email messages, so the example above doesn't change. In the filesystem implementation you'd be adding some more links, state tracking, and cleanup to the above, in addition to the extra code you'd have to add to do the actual work of sending emails.
Posted Jan 6, 2006 22:20 UTC (Fri)
by marduk (subscriber, #3831)
[Link] (1 responses)
In other words, MySQL may be technically inferior to other databases but for many people it works for them and it works well. The same could be said about other technologies (e.g. Abiword vs. OOo Writer): If it works for you, fine. If not, try something else. My guess is MySQL works for WordPress else they wouldn't be using it.
Posted Jan 12, 2006 8:20 UTC (Thu)
by ctg (guest, #3459)
[Link]
A better analogy is Windows Versus Linux. Linux is created with an
emphasis on engineering - good design, based on experience and review of
previous designs -
to get it right.
Windows is based on great marketing, capturing mindshare
etc. and being just about good enough. It was home grown, and failed to
make sure of a legacy of previous software developments - the "good
enough to ship" method just stores up problems further down the line
when the inadequacies of the design and
engineering come to light.
It's solid marketing with a "that'll do" product, versus solid
engineering, leveraging the collected wisdom and experience of the
community.
All credit to MySQL for grabbing mindshare - but I prefer the
engineering approach of the proper relational databases - building on the
experience and good practice developed over the past.
Of course, if MySQL is "good enough" and you are only interested in
the short term advantage, then use it by all means.
Posted Jan 7, 2006 7:40 UTC (Sat)
by aturner (guest, #4037)
[Link]
So while I'm annoyed to have to run MySQL and PHP (which I personally think is the worst
Posted Jan 7, 2006 20:57 UTC (Sat)
by dskoll (subscriber, #1630)
[Link]
I'm not sure how seamless it will be, but if it's reasonable, it will allow PostgreSQL users to run so-called MySQL apps without having to run two different database servers on their machine. I don't particularly like MySQL, and we use PostgreSQL quite heavily, so it's irritating to have to run them both just because some silly apps demand MySQL.
Sigh. So many good pieces of software are hobbled by MySQL dependance. I refuse to use software that doesn't support either Postgres or SQLite.WordPress 2.0 is better than ever (NewsForge)
I am perhaps not the right person to make this observation, as I try to avoid software that requries me to even know that it requires an *SQL database of any form, but... WordPress 2.0 is better than ever (NewsForge)
Blog software is full of little details about user identity, thread relationships, date stamps and the text of hundreds of thousands of articles. CompareWordPress 2.0 is better than ever (NewsForge)
my $rv = $dbh->do(q{
-- posted_time and article_id have DEFAULT values filled in automatically.
INSERT INTO posts (poster_id, article_text, parent_article_id) values (?, ?, ?)
}, {}, $poster_id, $article_text, $parent_article_id);
# You need to implement your own sequences, or generate UID's
while (1) {
open(ID, "<article-seq") or die;
last if flock(ID, LOCK_EX|LOCK_NB);
flock(ID, LOCK_EX);
}
my $id = <ID> or die; ++$id;
my $id_fh = IO::AtomicFile->open("article-seq.new", "w");
print $id_fh $id or die;
$id_fh->close() or die;
close(ID) or die;
# Create new article in a text file.
# Don't forget to clean up all the leftover ..TMP files if your
# system or process crashes, or the disk fills up while posting.
my $art_fh = IO::AtomicFile->open("articles/$id.txt", "w");
# And of course you'll have to parse this stuff too
print $art_fh "Article: $id\n" or die;
print $art_fh "Posted: " . time(). "\n" or die;
print $art_fh "Poster: $poster_id\n" or die;
print $art_fh "Parent: $parent_id\n" or die;
print $art_fh "\n$article_text" or die;
$art_fh->close() or die;
# And update all those indexes
link("articles/$id.txt", "posters/$poster_id/$id.txt");
link("articles/$parent_id.txt", "parent_articles/$id.txt");
This is like the "Torvalds vs. Tanenbaum" argument where one professes the "inferiority" of a technology without much regard to how productive many have found said technology to be.WordPress 2.0 is better than ever (NewsForge)
Hardly. Torvalds v. Tannenbaum is about a clash between two different
engineering/design approaches.
WordPress 2.0 is better than ever (NewsForge)
Well I just installed Wordpress (1.5.2 a few weeks ago and upgraded to 2.0 this week). I'm also a MySQL vs PostgreSQL
big PostgreSQL fan and while having cut my teeth on MySQL, I'll never willingly use it again because
PG is so superior.
programming language ever) on my server, but WordPress really is very nice and I'm quite happy
with it- they really did a nice job... it really is worth letting go of your rightly deserved distaste for
MySQL if you're looking for a good blogging setup.
There is a project in the PostgreSQL community to add a MySQL compatibility layer on top of PG: http://pgfoundry.org/projects/mysqlcompat/MySQL-to-PostgreSQL migration possibility